Steve Adler (4:38)

Good to be with you.

Harry Littman (4:39)

Jenny Durkin, an attorney, former federal Prosecutor, and Seattle's 56th mayor. She began her career as a criminal defense attorney and civil litigator. And then in 2009, President Obama appointed her the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Washington, a position she held until 2014. And she then served as Seattle's mayor from 2017-21, during which she was named one of the 25 Best World Leaders by Fortune magazine for her handling of the pandemic. She was Seattle's first female mayor since the 1920s. There must be a story there. The female mayor in the 1920s and its second openly LGBTQ mayor. Jenny Durkin, thanks so much for joining us.

Jenny Durkin (5:28)

So great to be here.

Harry Littman (5:30)

And Bill Peduto, or his honor to me, he served as the 60th mayor of Pittsburgh, my hometown, from 2014 to 2022. Before his election. He was a member of the Pittsburgh city council from 2002 to 2014. And he began his career and all three of our mayors have really distinct backgrounds to the job as a political director to acting Governor Mark Singel, and chief of staff to former City Councilman Dan Cohen. He now serves as president of the consulting firm Sabian Innovation. And he's a distinguished executive in res at Carnegie Mellon University, or some people would wrongly say Carnegie. Okay, let me start here. So I'm really interested in the ways that mayors have expanded their job descriptions in recent years to tackle national, even international social issues. But I'd like to start with a few questions at the most basic bread and butter, you know, Fiorello laguardia level. So what do you see as the kind of primary components of the job? What are the things that all mayors must do?

Jenny Durkin (6:42)

Well, so I Think that the beauty of having mayors here is that every mayor, small town, big town, big city, their job is to make sure things run well for the residents. And the nuts and bolts of being mayor is what you've got to get right first. And that includes filling potholes, picking up the garbage, keeping the power on, making sure that the roads get plowed, the very basic things that provide a city security and of course, public safety, because the base level, the social contract, requires those base amounts. But on top of that, because mayors are so proximate to the people that live in their city and usually recognized by the people in their city, they have the ability to move the needle on things that are really important to people, that when we do it together as mayors across the nation, it really creates a trend and a ripple across the country.

Harry Littman (7:34)

And I do want to talk about those trends. But so in terms of the pothole filling and the like, any thoughts, Mayor Peduto or Mayor Adler?

Bill Peduto (7:43)

I would just add that on the basics, it really does come down to public safety and public works. But unlike the federal government, where we all study in grade school, the division of the executive, the legislative and the judicial, local government is really the creation of the state. So you may have a local government that has a strong mayor system, you may have a local government that has a weak mayor system, you may have a system that doesn't even have a mayor. And there are different systems within that where a mayor may be in charge of the schools or they're not in charge of the schools, where authorities may be created that oversee special items such as water. So each local government government has different authority and power by which a mayor governs and what authority they have to govern dictated by the states in which they operate. So it's not as simple as what we know and what we learn in elementary school for federal government as it is in municipal government.

Harry Littman (8:57)

And Mayor Adler, my understanding is Austin is a so called weak mayor model. Am I right about that? And what are the practical challenges that that imposes sort of week to week?

Steve Adler (9:10)

I would always characterize it a little bit differently. I would characterize it as a city manager, council form of government, because I think that's the difference. I mean, who is the chief operating officer of the city in that form of government? The council is more like the board of directors and the mayor is more like the chair of the board. But as you were introducing, I think that the role is evolving over time. I think that began with governments where the mayor and the council folks were part time folks and they were just checking on the city manager doing the work. I think in most cities now that have a manager of form of government, the mayor and the council, certainly in large cities, has become a 24, 7 job, just like in other cities that have a strong mayor. And with that, I think has become a blurring of roles and responsibilities as the difference between policy and management becomes blurred in any given situation. But I think that Mayor Durkin was correct that in any form of government, regardless of the differences that Mayor Peduto talks about, the community is going to hold the mayor responsible for the fundamentals of government, making sure that people feel safe, making sure that public works happen, whether the mayor has primary responsibility for those things or not, he's going to have primary or she's going to have primary accountability. I think the tools that the mayor has in the city manager situation is the ability to be able to convene because most times when I call a meeting, people will show up because I'm mayor, and the ability to be able to use the bully pulpit because there's no one in the city that can command media attention. I think the way that mayors can, regardless of the form of government, which means the mayor has a really significant role in helping a city coalesce around ideas and direction, helping to set priorities in a city, helping to build coalitions and manage both potential and opportunity and expectations.

Harry Littman (11:13)

Can I stick with you for a minute then? Well, first of all, as Dan Gilman of Pittsburgh, you know, advised us, mayors get blamed for everything. I assume that's the case, but it's the city manager who actually makes the calls to make the. Well, you don't have snowplows, but the trains and public safety run on time. And yet the accountability is often dropped in the mayor's lap. That seems like a really tricky, inherent situation. Is that an accurate description?

Steve Adler (11:43)

It is kind of tricky. I mean, clearly, by charter, the manager who is hired by the council reports to the council and the council does the manager's review and can hire and fire the manager. So the manager is subordinates to the council. But in this role, it's also the manager's job to manage. It is the council's job to set policy. But as I said earlier, sometimes there's a real gray area where something is debatably management or policy, and that sometimes causes friction in those environments.

Harry Littman (12:17)

And mayors will stand for election, city managers won't. Right. So things go awry, they'll throw you out. Even if it's the city manager's doing.

Steve Adler (12:26)

Community does not like Hearing a mayor say, in any context, I didn't have the ability or power, you need to talk to somebody else. But the manager would be like a coo. The mayor would be like the chair of the board. And really, there is no CEO equivalent. I think that's one of the challenges associated with the strong manager system.

Jenny Durkin (12:47)

And, Harry, I think you really tripped on something that's important is the legal structures are one thing, but public expectations themselves have evolved so quickly. And today, with instantaneous communications and the proliferation of social media, people really look to their elected leaders to be responsible, particularly mayors. Former Mayor Mitch Landrieu had a great line during the Kavanaugh hearings. There was a scene where some women tried to stop Senator Flake from getting in an elevator and were kind of berating him about his. And Mayor Landrieu said, you know, that looks rough for us, Senator, but if you're a mayor, that happens 10 times while you're buying milk.

Harry Littman (13:26)

All right?

Jenny Durkin (13:26)

And I think that the power of the mayor is you can set that tone. You can convene. Whether it is in Austin, Miami, San Jose, which have city managers, the mayor is still a really important feature because they also can convene with other mayors to try to see what we can do better.

Harry Littman (13:43)

And I know you were U.S. attorney, and that's often one of the things that are said of US Attorneys convening power, at least of law enforcement. I want to stick with your point, though, Mayor Durkin, but maybe serve it up to all. So whatever the system is, the mayor, I think you've all suggested is primarily accountable. If there's really a lapse in public safety or we've seen stories that go national about plowing the roads and the like, that seems pretty bread and butter and one foot in front of the other. Although obviously there are times where things go awry. How does one mess them up? How does a mayor actually get crosswise on this very basic. Because I'm sure it can happen. Public safety and public maintenance roles that you've all suggested really come first, and you're always blamed for if it doesn't go right.

Bill Peduto (14:38)

Well, I think that sometimes it comes down not really to the management, but to the individual, especially in the situations that we saw after the murder of George Floyd. All of our cities had incidents because we had hundreds of protests. But sometimes an individual's actions would go away from the way that we trained officers or the standard operating procedures that they were to follow. And that one time where somebody would step out of line and take a situation into their own hands would be called upon by the public as the actions of our administration and namely ourselves. And I think within any organization, especially an organization that employs thousands of employees, you're going to see a breakdown occur a number of times during a week where somebody will take the wrong step. What that requires is that you have and you trust good managers in a system that goes throughout a series that it starts with, you know, there is never a great mayor unless you have a great chief of staff. And that follows down through the people that you hire to be your directors and your chiefs and that goes into the people that they hire to be those that are around them. And then the training that you're giving your individuals that are in leadership positions and that the training that you're giving your employees so that you minimize those times when that happens. But you have to be cognizant of always that the buck stops with you. And no matter what happens and no matter whose fault it is, you're the one that's going to wear it.

Steve Adler (16:31)

It's a really good answer. Also, our city has had two water boils cities over of a million people. Both of them very different, but both of them arising from extreme weather events. My community doesn't want to hear that they're boiling water because of an unavoidable extreme weather event. They just know they're boiling water. So sometimes the challenges come to you just because of the circumstances or the run events.

Jenny Durkin (16:57)

The only thing I might add to that, I think they're really right. I think the other thing that because of the role of the mayor being such a local office, being transparent and being visible and present is really important. Whether it's a sudden blizzard, a smoke emergency, you name what it is. For example, during the pandemic period, all through 2020, I had regular news interviews with each of the broadcast news, some print news and a radio appearance, as well as number of public appearances so that people would know what we were doing and why we were doing it. And I think that transparency and rather than hide and let someone else take the blame or the fall, be right up front when things go right and when things don't go as well.

Harry Littman (17:42)

That seems like an excellent point. And as I cast my mind back to debacles, often they've involved just a mayor not really being there. Before leaving the kind of basic both nuts and bolts in traditional role, I wanted to ask if there are any common misconceptions either you encountered when you first came into office or you find that your constituents have about the mayor's role that you wish they didn't.

Jenny Durkin (18:12)

I would say. I think most people think mayors have a wand and somehow something goes wrong, you can just wave it and it's going to be better. I mean, part of that accountability, the downside is they think you can fix everything, and if it isn't fixed, there must be something wrong. It's a power because it gives you the ability to affect change really rapidly that other elected offices don't have. But the downside is I really do think that sometimes they think you have a wand.

Bill Peduto (18:38)

I would agree, 100%.

Harry Littman (18:41)

In fact, I was somewhat ruefully. Yeah, 100.

Bill Peduto (18:43)

Yeah. No, I was trying to think of the words that, you know, the expectations are there for you to be able to solve other people's problems, whether it is outside of your constituency and even in the surrounding county, people expect you to be able to have the ability to change it. Or if it's under the jurisdiction of a county or a state or a federal, if it's happening within your borders, they expect you to be able to change it. And if you're not at least speaking out against it, even if that would mean losing the ability to build coalitions that you will need on the next day, they look at it as a terrible loss and not understanding that the next day matters as much as today.

Steve Adler (19:34)

And what they both said is true, even in a city with a city manager. Former government.

Harry Littman (19:41)

All right, so let's move now. I mean, I think it was really good that Mayor Peduto very useful to raise the George Floyd tragedy, because what I'd like to move now to in general is my sense, in part, we're exploring whether it's accurate of mayors having taken on much, much more ambitious kinds of issues in the last 10 years or so. And relatedly, some of them having become very visible, almost national figures and sort of the first identified line of government for things that we had thought of as being national preoccupations. But the reason Floyd struck me as a very interesting example, maybe a counterexample to much of what you often do is, is that it was clearly thrust upon mayors and maybe even a lot of the demands that ensued were things that were basically out of your toolkit. But nevertheless, as Mayor Durkin was just saying, you're the or mayor, the buck stops there. You are as big as government gets to so many constituents. So what about these things that just happen and you're forced to try to deal with, but they're not really something that the state or whatever the power model has afforded you the tools to actually affect.

Jenny Durkin (21:07)

You know, I think that's a really good question, and I think we saw it in spades in 2020. And I'll roll the camera back before George Floyd. I think when you saw the pandemic hit, talk about a series of events that mayors had no control over. But I really believe mayors saved America by coming together and thinking about what the best steps were for their individual cities, even before governors acted or the federal government acted. Then when you had the civil rights reckoning of George Floyd, suddenly cities throughout America had huge protests.

Harry Littman (21:40)

And it felt like at the city level, it was happening right at the city level.

Jenny Durkin (21:44)

And everyone expected mayors to be able to address it because usually the police departments are responsible to the mayors or the city manager. And that was where the rub was. They were anti police protests the police were responding to. And that created even more conflict. And then you had laid against that a national push by many for defund the police. And for the mayors who felt that you had a. That defunding the police was not the right solution, like myself, but you did have an obligation to have much stronger investments in communities of color. That scope of investment needed. Needed to happen at state and national levels as well. But cities had to be the first layer of reckoning.

Bill Peduto (22:26)

I may be wrong, but I don't believe there was one mayor in the United States that publicly endorsed the notion of defunding the police. I think from a practical and pragmatic understanding, every mayor in this country understood the need of reform within our public safety departments required resources in order to be able to change the way that urban policing would look in the 21st century. And that didn't require less resources. It required more. It meant that we would be able to provide our police with trained people who worked in the critical services of homelessness, addiction, and those that find themselves with mental health issues. It meant that we would be working with our county health agencies and with others and being able to create new opportunities within policing that would look very different. And I can speak, I believe, for the other mayors on this panel. They had been doing this for years before the murder of George Floyd, and they had been creating very creative and innovative programs where cities had not dwelled for a hundred years in health and human services, in order to be able to create new models not only within judicial reform, but within urban policing. And there's something about mayors that is very different than any other level of government. You know, we talk and we joke that there's three parties in the United States, Democrats, Republicans, and Mayors, Right. You know, we don't have badges that are blue and red. We don't have R's or D's by our names when we meet. We compete on ideas, we compete on innovation, and we really do. And we're proud of our cities, but we want to be that city that's one step ahead. And well before any of these protests started, these cities and a handful of others were leading in providing that next step of what policing would look like.

Steve Adler (24:49)

Now, let me take what Bill said and take it one element further to tie it back to the conversation we're having a second ago. In many cities, if not most cities across the country, mayors actually run for election in nonpartisan elections. They don't run as Republicans and Democrats. And oftentimes you don't know for sure what party a mayor is in, because it's a mayor's job not to make sure the potholes are filled, make sure that when the switches turn, the power comes on. That's the functioning of local government. But we were caught in this period of time. And I think the real challenge associated with the George Floyd summer was not that suddenly the issue of social justice was being confronted by mayors, because that wasn't new. Whereas Bill says re thinking about how to deliver public safety to a community, those were not new issues. But what accompanied that issue was a national partisan frame that impacted everyone's ability to do their work as mayors. And that made it difficult. Following George Floyd Summer in our city, we had our budget happen in August, and we passed a budget. And at the end of the budget, it was hard work. We worked on it for several weeks. And when I got home that night, I saw two tweets, one from my governor accusing me of having defunded the police, and one from one of my more progressive allies on the city council taking credit for having defunded the police. And I knew for an absolute fact that one thing we did not do in our budget was to fund the police. So I actually held a press conference the very next day, and I said, before this gets out of hand here, let's actually take a real hard look at what we did yesterday, because there's not a world in which someone could actually look at what we did and say we defunded police. The entire media was there because at that point, they were really interested in a defund. Yes, we should. No, we shouldn't have kind of discussion. So my press conference was not anything that they wanted to hear. And the reporting of us having defunded was launched at that Point. And people were defending us defunding and people were challenging us for defunding. And my little voice saying, wait a second, we didn't actually defund was lost. And there were the national framing function. I think more than any other things in recent years, on homelessness, on public safety issues, on policing issues, on Covid and Covid response. Mayors are really just trying to deal with what's immediately in front of them and trying to save their community and do their work. But it is hard now to do that in the context of the national framing.

Jenny Durkin (27:47)

I couldn't agree more with Steve. And I think that it gives us a glimpse of both kind of the dangers, but also what the salvation of the very torn partisan politics we have now. If you see how mayors work together across party lines, as Steve and Bill both said, sometimes you don't know if there's an R or a D because it's not part of our job. And when we meet together as mayors and we form tough alliances to kind of get the best ideas and try them in each other's cities. Cities have become the laboratory of America. But the more that they're assaulted and used as a partisan tool, the harder it is to do that. And so I think that mayors have a model showing how we can get it right, but they also show the jeopardy if it just becomes another partisan tug of war.

Harry Littman (28:34)

Let me stick with that for a second more generally, because I've heard two real themes in these last few minutes. One is innovation sometimes thrust upon you. One is a lack of resources. And it does seem to me that you don't have year in, year out, big changes or additional resources to work with. And I'll put a third thing in the hopper, which is it's a little bit unclear sometimes where the limits of a particular mayor municipality's powers stop. So I have the impression that sometimes the most successful mayors are kind of creative in asserting and then being able just from the assertion, to execute kinds of powers or different ways of going about things. Is that a fair assessment? And can you think of any times you did that in your own tenures?

Bill Peduto (29:28)

Well, I think you have three mayors that are incredibly blessed. Pittsburgh. Harry, as you know, was Seattle before Seattle. Right?

Harry Littman (29:37)

Exactly. Don't you forget that Mayor Durkin.

Bill Peduto (29:40)

We had Heinz and Mellon and Carnegie and Frick in Westinghouse. And I often joke it's a shame that Frick and Carnegie hated each other so much. Otherwise the university would have been known as Carnegie Frickin Mellon.

Harry Littman (29:57)

That's right. But those, those Robert Barron's GR children. They've got civic mindedness in Pittsburgh. It makes a big difference.

Bill Peduto (30:03)

And what do they have? The foundations. And what does Seattle have? The foundations. And what does Austin have? The foundations and universities and universities and hospitals. And not only that, but they have the corporations. And now what a mayor can do is exactly what Steve said at the very beginning. He has the ability to pull the people into his office. Jenny has the ability to pull people into the office. This is a 21st century mayor. A mayor who doesn't just work off of the tax base in that limited operating budget and that limited capital budget, but a mayor that can pull together what I call the PIPs, Public Institution and private. Pulling that together and being able to row together, being able to figure out, hey, we have a real problem with affordable housing. I need you guys to be able to do this. I need you guys to be able to do that. And we're going to do this, and let's solve it together. We have a problem with homelessness and we're going to have to work together to build a shelter. We had a meeting with Bill Demchak, the president of PNC bank, three or four years ago, and he wanted to know what we could do about downtown homelessness. And I said, we need a center, and it has to be a no barrier center. And it can't have any of these different types of rules that our religious institutions have and everybody else. And he said, you find me to the land and we'll put together the group and we'll use our construction team at PNC to be able to build it. And we opened that center this past November. That type of ability of a mayor goes beyond, which is 20 years ago. Yeah, mayors had the limited ability to do under an operating budget. This is how mayors in certain cities have been able to expand the ability of cities and in cities like Austin, in Seattle and Pittsburgh that are blessed with philanthropic and corporate and institutional power, a strong mayor, whether or not the system is whatever, has the ability to pull those people together.

Harry Littman (32:17)

Okay, and Mayor Peduto, you're talking in part. Well, you mentioned homelessness, which I know was a big concern in Seattle. In other words, we've so far talked about two big functions, the bread and butter plowing of streets or its Austin equivalent, and some very big ticket items that are sort of thrust on you. And everyone ascribes responsibility to you, like George Floyd. But now we're switching into an era really that really interests me, which is those sorts of initiatives that mayors of yore did not undertake. But at least some of the more visionary mayors, once they've kind of gotten the basics down, do on their own for improvement of quality of life in their cities. My sense is that is a relatively new phenomenon that kind of identifies the modern mayoralty and the sorts of things that they will teach at the Kennedy School, where I know new mayors can go. One always thinks that their current era is new and different. Is that fair, as you understand it in terms of mayor's function, that that kind of big ambition, big policy role is a new aspect of the modern mayoralty?

Jenny Durkin (33:35)

I think it is a little bit. You know, I had the honor of being no previous mayors of Seattle before I became mayor. And I think that so much of a mayor's focus in years before really, was on keeping their own municipality going and running and maybe expanded to the region. But I think we've been forced into some very national and global discussions, like climate change, that it required mayors to come together and talk to each other about initiatives and innovations.

Harry Littman (34:04)

Let me interrupt you, Mayor Durkin. Forced, you say, is that because of some power vacuum at higher levels of government or just because of the exigency of the problem?

Jenny Durkin (34:14)

I think it's both. I think there was the power vacuums at the higher level, particularly when the US Decided to withdraw from the Paris Accords.

Harry Littman (34:21)

Yeah.

Jenny Durkin (34:22)

And it was the dire consequences that each one of us have seen in our cities because of climate change. We couldn't ignore it. And we saw it's like a raft. If you get a lot of small logs together, pretty soon you can have a very formidable thing. And I think that's what mayors have tried to do, both nationally and internationally, is let's bind together on some innovations we can do to tackle problems, the same problems, because the synergies there will benefit not just our cities, but our regions, our states, and our country.

Steve Adler (34:53)

I can remember when I ran for office for the first time eight years ago, I did not run as somebody that came from City hall, actually really never paid that much attention to the mayors or section B of our newspaper. Those things just sort of seemed to be happening. So I was that classic person when I ran for mayor. I talked about the things that people were talking about in the community. And I did get initially the pushback that some of the things I was talking about were not things that were municipal functions or part of city government. And I think there might be a difference between what is the role of city government in a city and what is the role of the mayor? Because within my city, there was no issue that impacted the quality of life that my community did not want me to be involved in. And some issues it was easier to push to others if there was a strong operating, successful independent school district because education is not part of the portfolio. But there were times when education issues took the forefront in the community and people wanted to know where the mayor was on those issues. And I worked with the school board, helped them convene in ways that they couldn't help them use the bully pulpit that wasn't available to them. Because I do believe, as I suggested, that the role of the mayor transcends even the jurisdiction of the city. And I think that might be a newer trend.

Bill Peduto (36:17)

I think three things happened in the past decade that had a very strong impact on US mayors becoming much more involved in global issues. Number one is the quality of US mayors. Over these past 10 years. You had a very talented group of people who decided to run for office and who won. Number two, the second term of the Obama administration, after the first term of running into the wall of Congress, they decided to work primarily with governors and mayors on creating pilot programs and became much more experimental, even using their own departments. Steve and I met through the competitive grant challenge of the U.S. department of Transportation Smart City Challenge. And number three, the Trump administration, which pretty much put up another type of wall around a lot of the global cooperation on endeavors that involved a lot of different type of domestic type policies that involved international cooperation in cities around the world looking for partners beyond the sister city partnerships. As Jenny had talked about climate change, but also the migrant issue coming out of Syria and other issues. And mayor's basically figuring out that our little role multiplied times 10,000, had the effectiveness of what nations could not do.

Harry Littman (37:50)

Let me ask you about a little bit in political terms. So Mayor Adler talked about first getting flack of this isn't what mayors do. And I wonder if you're a solid mayor and all the, I'll just keep saying snowplows, my apologies. Mayor Adler are running well and you undertake some of these bigger vision items, do voters basically pass judgment based on the sort of nuts and bolts or the bigger stuff? In other words, when you undertake some of these things on your own because you want to and you think it's important, do you feel as if you're kind of putting your neck out there in political electoral terms or does a mayor who has gained the trust of the city for doing the basics well have wide berth to kind of indulge in these broader almost global issues?

Jenny Durkin (38:46)

Yeah, I don't Know what Stephen Bill would say, but I would say is you gotta mind the stove first. Those nuts and bolts issues, if you take your eyes off that, you lose permission to do anything else. And people are gonna grade you first on that. But once you do that, as long as what you're focused on is something that they see and aligns with something that's important to them in the city. During the pandemic, for example, we had no access to testing. And because of relationships I had built with the mayor of Seoul, Korea, through the climate organization we had of mayors, so I had to go out of the country. We were able to get test kits to set up testing for COVID 19 in Seattle, but that was the only way we could get it. The thing about mayors is you have to deal with the reality of people's lives, what's happening to them day in, day out. That's what they want you to focus on first. Homelessness is really important in cities because it impacts people. Climate change can impact people. Police reform and reimagining what police services are, each of those things is really important for us to be able to do. When I talked to the mayor in Korea, who was the mayor of Seoul, that was a connection I had already made. But I relied. I mean, I had Steve Adler and others on speed dial because, you know, when you're in a mayor, whatever hits you, there's very few things that are unique to any city. Somebody else has already done it, thought about it, and those kind of synergies, I think, really benefit, and the city will give you permission to do that as long as you take care of the nuts and bolts and they see the benefit.

Harry Littman (40:20)

To them, it sounds like this feature, the speed dial feature, is really a distinguishing point for modern mayors. I don't know what it was like well before the days of speed dial, but I gather that the savvy modern mayor talks a lot to other mayors. Yes. And is this sort of out of the blue, or are there organizations where mayors come together and it's a regular part of the job, or do you have to kind of invent the network, as it were?

Bill Peduto (40:51)

I would say, you know, there are the obvious organizations, the U.S. conference of Mayors being the main organization, National League of Cities as well. But the speed dial has never been used. I would say, as importantly, at the time of a crisis. We found out on Oct. 27, 2018, in Pittsburgh. Within hours of the horrific event at Tree of Life, mayors from around this nation reached out, and it was the mayors who had lived through tragedies of gun violence and the loss of life, who were the first to reach out to offer advice. And we refer to it as the committee that you never want to be on. And we worked together to build. You know, the one thing that I was asked afterwards was, what is it that you wish you had? And I said, I wish there were a book. And we put together a book, working with a professor out of Connecticut. And, you know, that advice is priceless, but so is talking to somebody who's lived it and hearing that voice on the other end who understands it. And once you've had that, as soon as you hear that story breaking, you're immediately looking online to find the number for that office, for that mayor in that city to be able to make that call to them.

Harry Littman (42:34)

And my sense is R or D, that mayor picks up the phone. And if you'll permit me, a quick parochial comment. Tree of Life was my childhood synagogue. I knew people had died. And I thought, mayor, you were really exemplary in a very important time, among other things, just for being there, it made a big difference. You were so present. All right, it is now time for a spirited debate brought to you by our sponsor, Total Wine and more. Each episode, you'll be hearing an expert talk about the pros and cons of a particular issue in the world of wine, spirit and beverages.

Total Wine and More Host (43:18)

Thank you, Harry. In today's spirited debate, the question bubbles up around the difference between champagne and sparkling wine, and we're more than happy to explain. First things first. Champagne is a type of sparkling wine, but not all sparkling wine is champagne. We could leave it at that, but that's not our style. So here we go. A sparkling wine can only be called Champagne if it comes from the region of Champagne in France. Any other bubbly produced outside of Champagne called sparkling wine. In this exclusive region of northern France, three types of grapes, Chardonnay, Pinot Noir, and Pinot Meunier, come together to produce what will become the Champagne you know and love. Champagne production is controlled by strict laws, so all of those grapes we just mentioned must be hand picked. It's a labor of love, right? The other difference comes from the fermentation process. Specifically, the second fermentation process that produces Champagne's signature bubbles. This time consuming fermentation takes place in the bottle and is known as the traditional method. Whereas some sparkling wines are fermented in a tank. Now, take a wine like Cava, which is made in the Champagne method, but because it's produced outside the region of Champagne, it's classified as. Yep, you guessed it sparkling wine. So if it's sparkling wine you want, Total Wine and More has a huge selection, including Prosecco, which comes from the Veneto region of Italy, sec from Austria and Germany, and Cremont, which comes from France, just outside of the Champagne region. But all these sparkling wines have something in common. They're amazing bottles that are available at Total Wine and More for you to take home, pop open, and compare not only to each other, but to champagne as well. Happy shopping and happy popping.

Steve Adler (45:04)

Cheers.

Harry Littman (45:04)

Thanks to our friends at Total Wine and More for today's a spirited debate. All right, let me talk about another constituency from your fellow mayors. I was a U.S. attorney, as was Mayor Durkin. And you know that when you get that call from the deputy attorney general, it's not necessarily a good thing. You like to be left alone. So I wanted to ask about mayor's general relationship. If one can generalize with governors and state officials, what's a general relationship with a governor like? And do most mayors prefer never to hear from the state capitol, as it.

Steve Adler (45:44)

Were, from where I sit? Because you kind of started with me. I wish that the relationship was better between our city and state leadership. I wish I heard from the governor more than I do. My governor more than not talks to me through tweets and through press conferences. And I think that's because the political agenda is just so strong. It's just hard to get past that. We saw that in Covid with respect to mask mandates. The mortality rate in Austin from COVID was less than half of the mortality rate in our state generally. We were dealing with the battles over what was the mayor's power, the city's power relative to the state. And I don't think that's constructive when that happens. We did the same thing on immigration issues. So I think that the political partisan fervor in our state, which is really pitting urban populations against rural populations, as is existing, what we see happening nationally is just so strong. It's really unfortunate. It's not productive, it's not constructive, but it is the reality that we deal with in Texas and where you've been.

Harry Littman (46:56)

Dealt a particularly tough hand, I would say in the contrast between Austin and state government, Mayor Durkin or Mayor Pedutta, you didn't have the same kind of at least partisan antagonism. Is a governor a partner here or somebody who, you know, when they call, you'd rather be on vacation?

Jenny Durkin (47:16)

I would say, you know, Governor Inslee, who's been governor during all my terms. I've known him before he was a great ally, particularly on Covid. But there's other issues where state government, it's convenient for them to be absent. Like on homelessness, you know, we've had a significant issue regarding homelessness where during my term we did some analysis and data and were able to determine that about 60% of the people who were in Seattle experiencing homelessness actually became homeless in a different city. But because we have such a strong sense of services and housing and, and many of them would be living on state rights of ways along the freeways and the state didn't want to get involved in those issues at first because it was seemed like such a political hot potato. But they've stepped up now. I just want to say one thing before Steve has to get off is I think he is the model of a great American mayor and leader because in terms of some of the difficult partisan issues, there's very few mayors that had it tougher than the mayor of Austin in a very red state with some of the most significant crises we've had in America, but able to rise above partisan politics as much as possible and focus on what's the right thing to do. And I think that's again why we're here talking is Bill Padut is able to do that as well, is to really focus on what's the right thing to do that's going to improve people's lives both short term and long term. I think looking at those models is going to be really important for the future of America. To say how do we create more of the Steve Adlers not just as mayors but as legislators and governors that we get away from these partisan battles and really focused on what are we trying to do to help people's lives.

Harry Littman (49:00)

And I'll add one point that you made earlier on, Mayor Durgan, that strikes me as a very important theme running through all of this, which is cities now as the so called laboratories of democracies that we used to think of state government is doing uniquely. But you're right, the people of Austin are going to start to be upset if we don't. We only have a minute or two left. We usually end talking feds with a so called talking five feature where you need to try to answer in five words or fewer. And the question here is you've given a lot of reason to think of difficulties that are inherent in the mayor's position, but mayors usually run for reelection. And so the question is, did you like the job and what did you like most about it that you know would lead you to want to keep doing it.

Bill Peduto (49:49)

Mine is all access pass to Pittsburgh. Pittsburgh kid. Never thought that I would be mayor. Grew up in Scott Township, far, far away, one mile away. First time in over 100 years that somebody who wasn't born in the city became the mayor. But from the boardroom to the church basement, getting to see the city through the eyes of everybody and getting to be in that type of a position. Win and trade it for anything and it will be the best job that I ever have in my life.

Steve Adler (50:20)

I love the unique ability to impact quality of life at scale.

Harry Littman (50:25)

Great. I mean, that's kind of what I loved, but less so with U.S. attorney and Mayor Durkin. You have the last five words here.

Jenny Durkin (50:33)

I'd say harnessing the positive power of community.

Harry Littman (50:37)

We'll let her go with the of. The of is, you know, just a little congestive.

Jenny Durkin (50:41)

Yeah, the ofs don't count, right?

Harry Littman (50:42)

Ofs don't count. All right, we are out of time in this special topical episode of Talking Feds. Thank you very much to Mayors Jenny Durkin, Steve Adler and Bill Peduto. And thank you very much, very much, listeners for tuning in to Talking Feds. If you like what you've heard, please tell a friend to subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts or wherever they get their podcasts. And please take a moment to rate and review the show. You can also subscribe to us on YouTube, where we are posting full episodes and my daily takes on top legal stories. Check us out as well on substack@harrylittman.substack.com where I'll be posting two or three bulletins a week breaking down the various threats to constitutional norms and the rule of law. And Talking Feds has joined forces with the contrarian. I'm a founding contributor to this bold new media venture committed to reviving the diversity of opinion that feels increasingly rare in today's newsland landscape, where legacy media seems to be tacking toward Trump for business reasons rather than editorial ones. Rest assured, we're still the same scrappy independent podcast you've come to know and trust just now linked up with an ambitious project designed for this pivotal moment in our nation's legal and political discourse. Find out more@contrarian.substack.com thanks for tuning in. And don't worry, as long as you need answers, the Feds will keep talking. Talking Feds is produced by Luke Cregan and Katie Upshaw, associate producer Becca Haveian, sound Engineering by Matt McArdle, Rosie Dawn Griffin, David Lieberman, Hamsa Mahadrenathan Emma Maynard and Hallie Necker are our contributing writers. Production assistants by Morgan Chisholm and Akshaysh Turbailu. Our editorial interns are Bridget Ryan and Troy Neville. Our music, as ever, is by the amazing Philip Glass. Talking Feds is a production of Deledo, llc. I'm Harry Littman. Talk to you later.

Jenny Durkin (53:08)

Sam.